Why I'm Not Afraid of the 'Gracious Exit'

One of the reasons I ended up becoming a United Methodist Minister is that I'm not all that great at math. I can add and subtract well enough. It's just that in the 8th grade when I hit algebra and they started introducing letters into the numbers, everything kind of went downhill. My lack of math prowess was one of many clear indicators that God wasn't calling me into civil engineering as a vocation. Ministry seemed like a much more viable option.

Math Clipart

The "Methodist math" for he 2019 General Conference doesn't bode well for the UMC's unity, cautions the Rev. Bryan Bucher.

But you don't have to be an actuary to understand United Methodist math. Barring an appeal from the most trusted and respected American United Methodist in all of Africa (thank you George Howard), the era of Book of Discipline "fuzzy enforcement" would have been over. Parts of the A&W Plan, which is essentially the new "Accountability Option", were speeding toward consideration on the floor of General Conference, while the previous forms of the "Local Option" and the more-complicated-than-algebra "Autonomous-Affiliated-Jurisdictional-Or-Whatever-It-Is Option" languished in committee. Only George's motion, which swung enough African delegation votes after Adam Hamilton's motion failed, stopped that train from reaching the station.

Which brings me back to the subject of United Methodist math.

In 2019 virtually the same delegations from all the various conferences from around the world will convene in St. Louis to take up what George Howard's motion delayed for three years. At that gathering the same three options - accountability, local, and the other one - will finally come up for vote. Only this time, the progressive wing of the denomination is more defiant and the conservative wing is more organized and determined.

The math will be the same.

When the WCA first started, and the news that it essentially had incorporated itself in such a way that it could be a new denomination in all fifty states, I'd have bet the conservative wing of the church was leaving. Why deal with two entire jurisdictions who were simply not going to enforce the Book of Discipline, and force you to exit each clergy member one trial at a time? Why tussle with the entrenched institutionalists who sat on the various boards and worked on the staffs of the various General Church agencies? Why try to face down bishops, the majority of whom are ready for some sort of compromise to move forward? I personally thought the WCA was angling to negotiate a "Gracious Exit" requiring an "exit fee" to protect the fiscal health of Wespath, and go start a new thing.

But the closer we get to St Louis next February, I'm not so sure. The conservative caucuses haven't indicated that they're up for anything other that total victory when it comes to matter of the Discipline and the future of the UMC. In fact, given a favorable Judicial Council, and estimates like this one where only a small percentage of the denomination are projected to leave if the Accountability Option were passed, I'm gathering that there's a heated discussion going on inside the WCA about whether or leave, or stay.

As a committed centrist who has been working toward a compromise where all people would be welcome in the United Methodist Church, I've dealt enough with various members of WCA leadership to know that there will be no compromise. This is a matter of principle upon which they will not budge. No scenario that would permit an ordained gay and lesbian clergy or an elected lesbian bishop to be in any way affiliated with them will be entertained.

Down the road, these same leaders I fear will become as hard-core about other issues as they are about LGBTQ exclusion. For those who stand for any "leftist" sounding cause (Health care reform? Gender equality? Compassionate immigration reform? Reasonable gun control?) or continue to call those to accountability for rejecting infant baptism, confirmation, and female clergy leadership, I have a hard time believing that eventually a target isn't going to be on your back too. If the denomination starts heading "right", my centrist colleagues agree that LGBTQ exclusion isn't where things will end.

It won't be enough if you've already affirmed the Book of Discipline and sought to uphold it. New litmus tests like the affirmation of the Nicene Creed (which hasn't been an issue in 1600 years) will be established to enforce a more literal view of scripture designed to align us with other evangelicals and the neo-con agenda in Washington. On-line sermons, I'm certain, will be reviewed, with anything deemed objectionable on the table for possible charges. Given the continued rhetoric, I expect the worst if the math from 2016 holds in 2019, and the road to 2020 leads toward greater restriction.

For these reasons, and others, I support the inclusion of "Gracious Exit" for any congregation or clergy who will not be able in good conscience to abide by the changes coming in our Book of Discipline. While there are currently no "winners or losers", and the future remains unwritten, this would insure the most practical and equitable criteria for any interested church or clergy members to follow.

To go further, I'd invite members of the WCA to an theologically inclusive table to discuss a "Gracious Exit" that would be fair and equitable to all. I'm sure the prospect of a world where a "Local Option" has won the day is as unappealing to you as the previous scenario is to me. Quite honestly, after years of fighting I just want to see our churches go forward as healthy as they can be, positioned to do the ministry of Jesus Christ to the best of their ability. If there truly is no middle way, I'd like us to be gracious as we take steps forward into the future.

While I will continue to pray for a unified United Methodist Church, I'm not going to ignore the math. Either way though - United Methodist or whatever is on the other side of it - I'll work toward a denomination that puts the local church first, and aims to make disciples of Jesus Christ equipped to change the world for the better. That's my prayer for all, whether walking together, or on separate paths, that we keep making the journey toward Kingdom of Heaven, following Jesus.

The Rev. Bryan Bucher serves as pastor of Shawnee United Methodist Church of Lima, Ohio. this post is republished with permission from his blog From Bryan's Office.

Tags

Comments (4)

A most reasonable view

Well said and thank you for posting. I really don't understand the argument that a formal split with a gracious exit option for either side means the end of Christianity. I mean, isn't that what Luther, Calvin, Knox and others did in the age of Reformation? The world is replete with Protestant denominations who in their own ways are striving to bring folks to the Triune God and a sense of holiness. Please explain how we would be setting a poor example by establishing two separate but Weslyan oriented denominations? If it's all about unity, then we should agree one means or tradition is the way, Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Lutherian, Anglican, Southern Baptist, Presbyterian, and all follow that type of Christian tradition because unity in worship and action is the paramount value.

John74 days ago

The unspoken issue

While traditionalists may be pleased with their majority and support from outside the US, there is an elephant in the room and it is African. In a short time, the UMC, should it survive, will be an African majority denomination. I suspect this will not be popular in some circles. Therefore, it is not out of the question that traditionalists will seek to break away.

The LGTB matters are simply a facet of the broader debate on the authority of scripture. Despite the fact that few parts of the Bible and none of the Gospels claim to be divine dialogue, many have made it such. This, however, invites hypocrisy as verses condoning things we hold as immoral today such as slavery, genocide, trial by ordeal, subjugation of women, etc. are ignored. It is often not noted that Jesus himself rejected scripture when it came to divorce and the woman taken in adultery and yet declared he had not come to destroy the Law. It would seem that some degree of interpretation is permitted.

As an observer from the outside, it seems the UMC has become more and more conservative over the years in its pronouncements. Previously, many current issues were not even mentioned and this raises the point of whether the UMC needs to have an opinion on everything. The church has not escaped the culture wars which are exactly that. There are different cultures in the US that can be traced back to the founding populations. "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America" by Colin Woodard explains this in great detail and it is shocking how little has changed over the centuries.

As I see it, the UMC and other main line denominations in the US will continue to suffer serious decline as the birthrate among their members is below replacement level and immigrants to the US are of other beliefs. Of course, the movement to secularism, which we have seen in Europe, will speed this.

David74 days ago

A house divided against itself

This article is the perfect example of a Wesleyan understanding of schism: love grown cold. Exactly what does a church have to offer the world when its clergy makes a habit of publicly dismantling each other because they each firmly believe that "I am the one with the right answer"? The way things are going, if the church does manage to stay together, it won't be long before the membership vows will include a declaration of which version of what it means to be a United Methodist we each subscribe to. But then that is exactly what the One Church model does--require people to declare loyalty to their particular understanding of what it means to be a United Methodist.

betsy74 days ago

Gracious exits?

I don't understand what a gracious exit would be. I don't understand where people think that's something that's possible. I guess if you came up with the equity and lived in a state that didn't support the Trust Clause, then maybe. But that's not really an option for most churches. That's the way things were designed. The annual conference is in charge. I'm assuming that theoretically a conference could secede from our union. Not sure if there are practical limitations to doing this, however.

But surely, progressive churches aren't negotiating with WCA churches. They would be negotiating with that 430th something general conference attendee. I wouldn't think that person is a member of WCA.

I will be surprised if 2019 GC passes anything. Our structure is actually working the way it was designed. Jurisdictions are the product of our distrust for one another and they are the protection as well. At the end of the day, things haven't changed for the people called Methodist, everyone has the same choice they have always had. To leave personally or love those they find unlovable.

Chad75 days ago

DONATE TO OUR MISSION

If you value receiving United Methodist Insight, please contribute to our financial support. Make checks payable to our sponsoring congregation, St. Stephen UMC, and write "UM Insight" on the memo line. Then mail to United Methodist Insight, c/o St. Stephen United Methodist Church, 2520 Oates Drive, Mesquite, TX 75150.